From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 08:39:39 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC] increase ia64 static per cpu area Message-Id: <4C4E9B4B.1080801@kernel.org> List-Id: References: <4c4e0a40170612ea22@agluck-desktop.sc.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <4c4e0a40170612ea22@agluck-desktop.sc.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org Hello, On 07/27/2010 12:20 AM, Luck, Tony wrote: > I've been trying to avoid this for a long time ... but per-cpu space > has slowly been growing. Tejun has some patches in linux-next that > pre-reserve some space (PERCPU_DYNAMIC_EARLY_SIZE) for use before > slab comes online ... and this pushes ia64 above the 64K current > limit on static percpu space. Yeah, more stuff are moving to percpu area. I'm thinking about increasing PERCPU_DYNAMIC_RESERVE too as it's overflowing in most common cases now, but it's not really a bad thing tho. Many of those used to use NR_CPUS allocations instead so overall I don't think we're wasting memory. > I could probably squeeze it back under (we are only over by 512 bytes). > But I don't think that I'll be able to squeeze it down enough to build > a comfortable breathing space - and I don't want to keep nibbling off > a dozen bytes here and there every time some generic code bumps us > back over the limit. > > Next available supported page size is 256K ... so we have to quadruple > the available space - a bigger jump than I'd like. But perhaps it will > be enough to last a few more years before it needs to be increased again. > > Signed-off-by: Tony Luck Acked-by: Tejun Heo I suppose this would go through ia64 tree? Thank you. -- tejun